[Jacob-list] Registration Requirements

[wolfpen]

Mary and all,

I once asked if we could have photos in the newsletter for evaluation by the inspectors as a tool to educate.  It just wasn't feasible, nor was the photo quality good enough.  I think it would be wonderful to do something like that on the Internet.  We could learn alot that way and some of the terms would be so much easier to visualize.  

I'm just going to add one more thought here to this thread.  Three years ago my ram failed for forward horns.  Old story, most of you have heard it.  Janine Fenton wrote me a very nice, detailed letter as to her reasoning.  She invited me to phone her with questions.  I did then and numerous times after.  She patiently explained terminology, reasons for her decisions and why she felt some traits should not be kept in a breeding flock.  She looked at photos I sent later, giving me her opinion as to why or why not the animal would be a valuable breeder.  The whole experience became a very important educational experience for me.  Now, I will say that my first reaction was almost angry.  But, by listening to someone with way more experience and knowledge than I have, and by the kindness of Janine, it was turned into a positive experience.  In my limited experience with talking to other inspectors, I have always found them willing to answer questions, to explain decisions and share knowledge.  These guys aren't the bad guys.

Linda




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jim Spahr 
  To: Jacob List Members 
  Sent: 16 April, 2000 12:29 PM
  Subject: [Jacob-list] Registration Requirements


  Thom,
   
  I agree that the silver lining in this cloud for you could be that we propose a better defining of the terminology used in registration criteria.  I would still like to see actual photos published.  This might save a lot of hurt feelings and the $10 registration fee.  I would be glad to donate any photos I have for such purposes.  Does anyone else have any that they would be willing to share?  Perhaps we could scan them directly to the list and have everyone submit their evaluations.  
  It might help if the disqualifying criteria were worded to state "undifferentiated and/or unbalanced.  I think that is the intended meaning. 
  On the subject of only Jacobs that look good being registered in JSBA, we have 7 ewes out of around 60 or so, that have fused horns and are JSBA registered.  It is the rams that they are more stringent about when it comes to registration.  Personally, I am very glad of this.  When we had our first Jacobs 12 yrs. ago, we had some UGLY rams born with lobster-claw-like horns.  This trait was passed down in varying degrees.  Subsequently, we bred exclusively for 2-horned Jacobs for years.  We developed a super-wide hornset on our 2-horned Jacobs. We began to see photos of  4-horned Jacobs with striking hornsets, and decided that we would like to preserve the polycerate gene if we could use rams with horns of this quality.  We purchased Puddleduck Sir James 4 yrs. ago, and now have 4-horned ewes and rams that we are proud of.  No, I do not think that registration of a ram in JSBA means that this is how they want ALL rams to look.  I think that it means that the ram conforms to the breed standards, which allow for quite a bit of diversity in looks. I hope that you will continue to be interested in your Jacob sheep.     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/jacob-list/attachments/20000416/3e448798/attachment.html